Pelosi deserves a vote of “no confidence”

Pelosi’s vitriol was on full display yesterday. Before the vote on the behemoth bailout, she unloaded on anything and everything Republican. It was indeed awesome.

It does give one pause to wonder what could possibly be behind such a tirade especially when it appeared she’d gotten exactly what she wanted. The Dems would have enough Rep votes to easily lay any blame on the opposition should the bailout fail to deliver the economy from its slide toward a recession. In addition Dems in tough races were able to vote against the bill as their constituents wanted. So what would cause Pelosi to unload on the Republicans?

Guilt comes to mind first. Partisan Pelosi and her cronies are every bit as responsible for the current state of the economy as she would have you believe the Republicans are.

Then there is the fear she might in some way get blamed for the recession. She is after all committed to the “never take responsibility when you can blame someone else” theory of survival. Her tactics are lacking in sufficient finesse to carry that off with the independent voters but her loyal minions will accept the subterfuge.

Or maybe she felt it was a final opportunity before the Republicans became her partners in crime. Even in politics it is considered bad form to attack one’s partner at least overtly.

Whatever reason justified that destructive urge, hyperpartisanship and paranoia do not belong in Congress most especially in its leaders. Steny Hoyer would be so much better for the country during this time of uncertainty. Pelosi deserves a vote of “no confidence” and a demotion to back bencher. Of course, it won’t happen but it is satisfying to entertain the thought.

More: The Atlantic/Megan McArdle – The politics of the bill

And more: The Washington Times/Wesley Pruden – A job for the right woman

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

McCain, Obama and Governing Styles

McCain took action. Obama took phone calls. It’s that simple.

This has nothing to do with who is right or wrong or who had the best ideas regarding the Wall Street bailout. The events of the last few days just make it more obvious what we can expect from the candidates’ different approaches. Acting/negotiating vs. talking/thinking.

Even in the debate two days ago, the different approaches were plain. McCain reminds us of what he did and Obama reminds us of what he said. McCain is a man of action. Obama is a man of words. No wonder the Dems fear a McCain presidency for surely it means things will get done and not just discussed.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine